■ 


AN  ORATI^> 

ON 


DELIVERED  BEFORE  THE 


PHILOMATHIAN  SOCIETY, 


OF 


JEiount  Inint  Jfianfs  Cnllfgp,  3EA 


JUNE  29th.  1853. 


BY  O.  A.  BROWNSON,  L.  L.  D. 


BALTIMORE: 

PRINTED  BY  MEDIAN  & O’BRIEN, 

82  BALTIMORE  STREET 
MDCCCLIII. 


AN  ORATION 


ON 


DELIVERED  BEFORE  THE 

PHILOMATHIAN  SOCIETY, 

OF 

Jllnunt  iaint  JUimj’s  Cniltgf,  MK 


JUNE  29th,  1853. 


BY  o.  A-  BROWN SON,  L.  L.  D. 


BALTIMORE: 

PRINTED  BY  MEDIAN  & O’BRIEN, 

82  BALTIMORE  STREET! 

MDCCCLIII. 


PHILOMATHIAN  HALL, 

June  29th , 1853. 

Dear  Sir  : — 

The  Philomathian  Society,  of  Mt.  St.  Mary’s  College  presents  through  us, 
its  grateful  acknowledgement  for  the  pleasure  derived  from  your  able  and  eloquent 
address  of  this  morning,  and  respectfully  solicits  a copy  for  publication. 

With  sentiments  of  highest  regard. 

Your  obedient  servants. 


0.  A.  Brownson,  Esq,. 


L.  T.  CHATARD, 

J.  F.  KNIGHT, 

S.  M.  CHATARD, 
JNO.  F.  LAFARGE, 
GEO.  S.  HEBB, 
THOS.  BOUDAR. 


Committee. 


Boston,  July  19,  1353. 

Gentlemen  : — t 

In  compliance  with  your  flattering  request,  I place  a copy  of  my  Oration  at 
your  disposal,  to  publish  or  not,  as  you  may  judge  proper. 

I have  the  honor  to  be,  gentlemen. 

Your  most  obedient  servant, 

0.  A.  BROWNSON. 

L.  T.  Chatard,  J.  F.  Knight,  S.  M.  Chatard,  &c..  Committee. 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2017  with  funding  from 

University  of  Illinois  Urbana-Champaign  Alternates 


https://archive.org/details/orationonliberal00brow_0 


ORATION. 


Gentlemen  : 

I thank  you  very  sincerely  for  the  honor  of  being 
selected  as  your  orator  on  this  most  interesting  anniversary 
to  you  and  your  personal  friends.  It  is  always  an  honor  to 
be  called  upon  to  address  those  who  are  preparing  them- 
selves in  academic  halls,  or  having  completed  their  academic 
course,  are  bidding  adieu  to  the  quiet  and  peaceful  scenes  of 
college  life,  and  taking  their  leave  of  beloved  classmates  and 
venerated  professors,  to  go  forth  and  bear  an  active  and 
honorable  part  in  the  multifarious  affairs  of  this  work-day 
world ; but  it  is  more  especially  so  to  be  invited  to  address 
a literary  society  connected  with  this  venerable  college  of 
Mount  St.  Mary,  already  so  rich  in  classic  associations,  so 
hallowed  by  the  memory  of  saintly  virtues,  and  so  dear  tD 
every  American  Catholic  heart  for  the  eminent  servants  of 
the  Church  of  God  it  has  nurtured. 

Although  I may  repeat  several  things  which  I ventured  to 
advance  in  this  hall  some  five  years  since,  I have  thought 
that  I could  not  better  respond  to  the  confidence  which  calls 
me  here,  than  by  inviting  my  young  friends  to  follow  me  in 
some  remarks  on  Liberal  Studies  in  Relation  to  the 
Wants  of  a Free  State.  I shall  have  thus  the  advan- 


6 


* 


tage  of  treating  a subject  to  which  your  minds  must  have 
often  been  turned  during  your  collegiate  course,  and  of  con- 
necting what  has  been  your  occupation  as  students  with 
what  are  to  be  your  practical  duties  as  American  citizens. 

Liberal  studies,  as  the  name  itself  implies,  whether  etymo- 
logically or  historically  considered,  are  those  studies  or 
those  arts  which  are  proper  for  the  free  as  distinguished  from 
the  menial  or  servile  classes  of  society,  or,  in  more  modern 
language,  the  nobility  as  distinguished  from  the  people,  gen- 
tlemen as  distinguished  from  simplemen.  Originally  noble- 
man meant  nothing  more  nor  less  than  freeman , and  in 
Hungary  to-clay  all  freemen  are  noble. 

The  distinction  of  society  into  two  classes,  the  one  free, 
the  other  servile,  the  one  noble  and  the  other  low,  or  the  one 
gentle  and  the  other  simple — is  older  than  profane  history, 
and  in  one  form  and  under  one  name  or  another  has  always 
existed  ; and,  as  long  as  human  nature  remains  what  it  is, 
probably  will  continue  to  exist.  Perfect  equality  of  ranks 
and  conditions  is  never  found,  is  never  to  be  expected,  and 
is,  indeed,  incompatible  with  the  very  idea  of  society  itself. 
The  distinction,  whether  a good  or  an  evil,  is  a fact  in  all 
society,  and  in  vain  do  we  seek  by  political  constitutions, 
social  arrangements,  and  legislative  enactments  to  obliterate 
or  disguise  it.  It  exists  and  re-appears  at  every  step  under 
all  forms  of  civil  polity  and  social  organization, — in  demo- 
cratic America  no  less  than  in  aristocratic  England,  feudal 
Germany,  monarchical  France,  and  despotic  Turkey;  in  the 
so-called  Free  States  of  the  North  no  less  than  in  the  Slave 
States  of  the  South.  The  entire  universe,  having  its  proto- 
type in  the  Eternal  Nature  of  God,  in  the  ever-blessed 
Trinity,  Unity  in  essence  and  distinction  in  persons,  is  hier- 
archically organized  and  governed,  and  save  in  the  sense  of 
justice  between  man  and  man,  and  man  and  society,  equality 
is  an  idle  dream,  an  empty  word, — nay,  an  impious  word,  fit 
only  to  be  inscribed  on  the  blood-red  banner  of  the  atheisti- 


7 


cal  Revolutionist.  Whoso  seeks  to  reduce  all  men  to  the 
same  level,  whether  by  levelling  downwards  or  by  levelling 
upwards,  wars  against  God  and  Nature.  Diversities  of 
ranks  and  conditions  are  in  the  order  of  Divine  Providence, 
and  obtain  even  in  Heaven,  where  there  are  many  mansions, 
and  where  the  Saints  dilfer  from  each  other  as  one  star  dif- 
fers from  another  in  glory.  Society  without  them  is  incon- 
ceivable, and  were  undesirable.  It  would  be  as  dull  and  as 
monotonous  as  the  boundless  sandy  plain  diversified  by  no 
variety  of  hill  and  dale,  mountain  a*nd  valley,  land  and 
water — where  the  flocks  and  herds  find  no  pasture,  the  bird 
no  grove  or  bush  from  which  to  carol,  and  man  no  habita- 
tion. It  would  lose  all  its  charms,  all  its  variety,  all  its  ac- 
tivity, and  become  stagnant  and  putrid  as  the  ocean  when 
the  long  calm  sleeps  on  its  bosom. 

“ Order  is  Heaven’s  first  law,  and  this  contest. 

Some  are,  and  must  be,  greater  than  the  rest.” 

You  of  the  South  consist  of  freemen  and  slaves,  of  gentle 
and  simple,  and  so  do  we  of  the  North.  In  both  sections 
we  find  at  bottom  the  same  distinction  of  classes,  though 
while  you  have  the  manliness  to  avow  it,  we  have  the  art  to 
disguise  it  from  the  careless  observer,  under  the  drapery  of 
fine  names.  You  call  your  slaves  by  their  proper  name,  and 
\\  hile  you  impose  upon  them  the  duties  of  slaves,  you  relieve 
them  from  the  cares  and  burdens  of  freemen ; we  call  our 
slaves  freemen,  and  impose  on  them  the  labors  and  burdens 
of  slavery,  while  we  secure  to  them  none  of  the  advantages 
of  freedom.  The  only  advantage  we  can  claim  over  you  is, 
that  our  slaves  being  of  the  same  race  and  color  with  our 
freemen,  are  individually  less  hopelessly  slaves  than  yours. 
The  class  is  as  permanent  with  us  as  with  you ; but  individ- 
uals of  the  class  may  more  easily  escape  from  it,  and  rise  in 
their  own  persons  or  in  their  children  to  the  class  of  free- 
men. But  on  the  other  hand,  if  our  slaves  are  under  cer- 
tain aspects  less  slaves  than  yours,  our  freemen  are  less  free 


8 


than  yours.  The  Southern  gentleman  has  a personal  free- 
dom and  independence,  which  we  rarely  find  in  the  North- 
ern gentleman,  and  which  give  to  Southern  manners  a charm, 
a freshness,  an  ease,  and  a grace,  which  our  Northern  man- 
ners, I am  sorry  to  say,  for  the  most  part  lack. 

It  is  of  no  use  to  war  against  this  inevitable  distinction. 
To  attempt  either  with  you  or  with  us,  to  obliterate  it  and 
make  all  freemen  can  result  only  in  the  destruclion  of  free- 
dom and  the  reduction  of  all  to  slavery;  as  the  attempt  to 
make  all  gentlemen  can  end  only  in  leaving  no  gentlemen, 
and  in  reducing  all  to  simplemen,  with  low  and  vulgar  tastes, 
habits,  and  manners.  It  is  then  our  duty  to  accept  the  dis- 
tinction of  classes  as  a social  fact,  permanent  and  indestruct- 
ible in  civilized  society,  and  conform  to  it  in  all  our  political 
and  social  arrangements. 

The  strength  and  glory  of  a nation  depend  not  on  the 
vulgar,  the  commonalty,  the  low  born,  the  servile,  or  the 
simple,  but  on  its  freemen,  its  gentlemen,  its  nobility.  It  is 
one  of  the  saddest  as  well  as  one  of  the  silliest  mistakes  of 
our  age,  that  the  few  may  be  safely  overlooked,  and  for  all 
that  is  great  and  good,  wise  and  just  in  the  action  of  the  state 
or  of  society,  reliance  must  be  placed  on  the  many,  on  the 
masses  so-called.  But  a nation  is  wise  and  great,  good  and 
just,  only  in  its  freemen,  its  noblemen;  and  a great  nation 
without  nobles  or  gentlemen,  titled  or  untitled,  is  an  unheard 
of  anomaly.  You  may  tell  me  there  is  no  army  without 
private  soldiers ; but  there  is  even  less  an  army  without  a 
general.  It  is  the  man,  Bonaparte  was  accustomed  to  say, 
not  the  men  that  is  the  principal  thing.  Give  us  the  man 
qualified  to  organize  and  command  an  army,  and  an  army 
he  will  rarely  lack.  He  will  find  everywhere  the  materials 
needed.  All  troops  are  brave  under  brave  and  competent 
officers,  and  no  matter  how  brave  the  men  may  naturally  be, 
they  will  be  cowards  in  action  if  their  officers  are  incompe- 
tent or  white  livered.  As  long  as  the  gentry  and  nobility  of 

% 


9 

a country  retain  their  integrity,  are  high-minded,  patriotic 
and  virtuous,  really  deserving  the  name  of  generosi,  it  stands 
firm,  and  has  in  itself  the  recuperative  energy  speedily  to  re- 
c over  from  any  reverses  it  may  for  a moment  experience ; 
but  let  these  fail,  or  let  them  become  corrupt,  base  and  sel- 
fish in  their  principles  and  feelings,  real  churls  in  their  char- 
acter, and  you  may  see  the  hand  writing  on  the  wall  record- 
ing its  doom.  Its  days  are  numbered  ; it  is  weighed  in  the 
/ balance  and  found  wanting ; and  it  must  speedily  fall  to  rise 
no  more  forever. 

I tell  you  only  what  you  must  have  read  in  the  histories 
you  have  studied.  When  flourished  ancient  Athens  ? Was 
it  not  when  her  Eupatrids  were  really  free  and  noble  ; when 
they  retained  the  virtues  of  the  olden  times,  and  were  chiv- 
alric,  generous,  brave,  and  patriotic?  Was  it  the  arms  of 
all-conquering  Rome  that  prostrated  her  in  the  dust,  and 
left  her  wallowing  for  long  ages  in  the  mire?  Why  gained 
h e Roman  a victory  which  the  Persian  with  far  greater  for- 
ces failed  to  win  ? Because  Athens  had  not  men  ; because 
her  population  had  dwindled,  or  her  wealth  been  exhausted  ? 
By  no  means.  But  because  she  had  no  Miltiades,  no  Aris- 
tides, no  Themistocles.  Her  Eupatrids  had  lost  their  no- 
bility, had  ceased  to  be  freemen,  and  the  poor  people,  brave 
even  to  daring,  were  beaten  for  the  lack  of  brave  and  compe- 
tent leaders.  Had  the  brave  old  tyrant  of  the  Chersonesus 
commanded,  as  at  Marathon,  the  Roman  iEmilianus  had 
perhaps  shared  the  fate  of  the  Persian  Datis.  The  decline 
of  Rome  dates  from  the  corruption  of  her  nobles,  and  she 
fell  when  they  had  lost  all  vestiges  of  the  old  Roman 
virtues. 

At  the  time  when  the  Barbarians  began  to  cross  the  Rhine 
and  invade  the  Gallic  provinces  of  the  Empire,  those  provin- 
ces were  as  fi'ch  and  as  populous  as  modern  France,  and  per- 
haps even  more  so ; and  yet  what  more  contemptible  than 
the  resistance  they  offered  ! Indeed,  they  seem  to  have 


V 


10 


offered  no  resistance  at  all.  In  heading  their  history,  it 
seems  as  if  with  the  Imperial  armies  the  whole  population 
disappeared,  and  the  invaders  took  possession  of  a country 
without  inhabitants.,  Yet  the  Romano-Gallic  people  re- 
mained on  the  soil,  and  in  numbers  of  a hundred,  if  not  of  a 
thousand,  to  one  of  the  conquerors.  France  under  Charles 
le  Chauve  was  populous,  wealthy,  cultivated,  and  possessed 
of  vast  resources  both  for  defence  and  conquest,  as  Charle- 
magn  had  proved,  and  yet  a handful  of  Norse  pirates  were 
able  to  ravage  her  coast  with  impunity,  to  sail  up  her  rivers 
into  the  interior,  to  sack  even  the  city  of  Paris,  to  plunder 
her  sacred  shrines,  churches,  and  monasteries,  massacre  or 
enslave  her  priests  and  religious,  and  to  threaten  the  con- 
quest of  the  whole  kingdom,  with  no  resistance  worth  men- 
tioning but  from  the  dead,  and  their  ravages  were  interrupt- 
ed only  by  the  conversion  to  Christianity  of  their  famous 
Chief  Rollo.  Why  was  this?  Because  her  people  were 
cowards,  and  could  not  be  induced  to  fight  in  their  own  de- 
fence ? We  all  know  better,  in  all  ages,  and  under  all 
dynasties,  the  French  people  have  been  brave  and  warlike, 
none  more  so.  It  was  not  the  men,  but  the  man  that  failed 
not  the  people,  but  their  Chiefs.  Her  noblemen,  her  gen- 
try, lacked  the  virtues  of  their  order,  had  become  selfish 
and  mean,  land  were  chiefly  engaged  in  plundering  the 
Church  and  one  another.  The  moment  a man  appears,  the 
Great  Hugh  Capet,  founder  of  the  third  dynasty  of  French 
kings,  or  rather  of  the  line  of  French  as  isting  uished  from 
Frankish  mdnarchs,  the  whole  face  of  things  is  changed, 
and  the  kingdom  from  being  unable  to  defend  itself  against 
the  petty  expeditions  of  the  Norsemen,  suddenly  rises  to  the 
rank  of  the  first  power  of  Europe,  Why  again  lies  Ireland 
prostrate  for  ages  with  the  armed  heel  of  the  Anglo-Saxon 
on  her  neck?  Because  her  people  fail?  Because  she 
wants  men?  The  armies  of  England,  France,  Austria,  and 
Spain  have  long  since  proved  the  contrary.  No  people  are 


11 


shrewder,  more  intellectual,  moral,  religious,  braver,  or  more 
capable  of  endurance  But  it  is  her  nobility,  her  gentry  that 
fail  through  corruption,  venality,  or  want  of  national  char- 
acter. She  has  no  chiefs  Give  her  a man  who  would  be 
to  her  what  Wellington  might  have  been,  what  he  was  to 
all  countries  but  his  own,  or  a nobility  and  gentry  as  truly 
Irish,  as  the  nobility  and  gentry  of  England  are  English,  and 
she  would  instantly  throw  off  her  foreign  oppressor,  and 
rise  to  a high  and  commanding  position  among  the  free  na- 
tions of  the  world  But  what  can  she  do  without  a man, 
without  chiefs,  or  when  those  who  should  be  her  nobles  and 
her  gentlemen  are  each  for  himself,  without  patriotism, 
without  virtue,  capable  of  being  bought  by  a paltry  office 
whenever  the  British  Ministry  regard  them  as  worth 
buying? 

All  history,  if  you  know  how  to  read  it,  proves  that  it  is 
the  nobility,  or  the  gentlemen,  that  make  the  nation,  and 
determine  its  rank  and  character  among  the  nations  of  the 
earth,  never  the  people  as  detached  or  distinguised  from 
them.  I speak  not  against  the  people;  I have,  perhaps, 
more  genuine  love  and  respect  for  them  than  have  the  wordy 
demagogues  who  make  it  their  business  to  flatter  and  cajole 
them,  that  they  may  use  them  ; but  I tell  you,  young  gentle- 
men, however  democratically  inclined  you  may  be,  that  God 
gives  to  every  nation  an  aristocracy,  titled  or  untitled,  re- 
cognized or  unrecognized  by  the  civil  constitution,  heredi- 
tary or  unhereditary,  whose  mission  it  is  to  guide  and  lead 
the  people,  and  to  direct,  sustain,  and  defend  their  interests. 
When  these,  by  faction,  by  sloth,  by  luxury,  or  venality  are 
deprived  of  their  nobility  and  strength,  or  when  through  the 
neglect  or  abuse  of  their  powers  they  have  no  longer  the 
capacity  or  the  disposition  to  discharge  the  proper  duties  of 
their  state,  the  glory  of  the  nation  has  departed,  its  days,  as 
I have  said,  are  numbered,  and  its  people  are  as  sheep  with- 
out a shepherd.  As  long  as  a nation  is  really  a living  na- 


12 


tion,  as  long  as  it  has  a future,  and  a part  to  play  in  the 
great  drama  of  nations,  it  has  and  must  have  its  generosi,  its 
nobility,  its  aristocracy,  who,  although  the  smaller  part, 
must  always  be  regarded  as  its  pars  sanior,  and  act  as  its 
chiefs  and  counsellors.  When  these  are  true  and  loyal, 
your  nation  prospers ; when  they  become  base  and  corrupt, 
or  when  they  lose  the  manners,  sentiments  and  virtues  of 
their  order,  and  adopt  those  of  the  people,  there  is,  save  in 
God's  gracious  providence,  no  longer  any  hope  for  the  na- 
tion. It  is  on  the  brink  of  the  precipice,  rushing  headlong 
into  the  abyss  of  barbarianism  that  yawns  below.  Ask  the 
Oriental  States  of  antiquity,  where  the  nobles  lost  their 
nobility,  not  as  they  are  now  losing  it  by  the  despotism  of 
the  people,  but  by  the  despotism  of  the  monarch,  who  suf- 
fered no  head  but  his  own  to  rise  above  the  universal  level, 
if  it  is  not  so.  Ask  ancient  Assyria  and  Egypt,  Tyre  and 
Carthage,  if  it  is  not  so.  Let  the  recently  disinterred  re- 
mains of  Nineve,  the  mummies  brought  hither  from  the  cat- 
ecombs  of  Thebes,  the  degraded  Moslemin  groping  amid  the 
fallen  colonades  and  broken  capitals  of  Balbec  and  Palmyra, 
the  poor  fisherman  drying  his  nets  on  the  site  of  ancient 
Tyret  where  once  her  merchant  princes  did  congregate, 
or  the  wild  Curd  robbing  the  defenceless  traveller,  over  the 
graves  of  forgotten  nations  read  you  your  ansewer,  and 
teach  you  better  than  to  listen  for  one  moment  to  the  insane 
dreams  of  modern  demagogues  and  radicals,  who  would  per- 
suade you  that  the  strength  and  glory  of  a nation  are  in  the 
ignorance,  selfishness,  and  vulgarity  of  the  many,  not  in  the 
science,  the  wisdom,  the  disinterestedness,  the  chivalry,  the 
heroism  of  the  few, — the  nobility  and  gentry,  by  whatever 
name  you  choose  to  call  them.  The  wise  man  weighs  votes, 
he  does  not  count  them.  He  seeks  the  approbation  of  the 
few,  not  of  the  multitude,  who,  as  Pope  John  the  XXII. 
says,  are  always  wrong.  Quicquid  laudat , vituperio  dignum 
est ; quicquid  cogitat , vanum  ; quicquid  loquitur jalsum  ; 


13 


quicquid  improbat , bonum ; quicquid  extollit,  inf  amt  est. 
And  the  most  discouraging  thing  in  our  beloved  country,  for 
I trust  that  whatever  her  faults,  we  all  love  her,  and  should 
were  those  faults  a thousand  times  greater,  is  the  tendency 
to  place  the  servant  above  the  master,  and  the  rapid  decline 
of  the  better  class,  the  disappearance  of  our  gentlemen  from 
high  official  station,  and  the  entrusting  of  all  affairs  to  the 
management  of  men  who  want  nobility,  ele\ation,  and  man- 
liness of  character. 

The  prejudice  against  aristocracy  arises  from  the-  very 
common  error  that  if  there  is  an  aristocracy  it  must  exist 
for  itself,  and  that  the  people  must  be  held  to  exist  for  the 
aristocracy,  not  the  aristocracy  for  the  people.  I have  as 
little  sympathy  as  any  of  my  democratic  countrymen,  with 
the  doctrine  which  teaches  that  the  many  are  made  to  be 
“hewers  of  wood  and  drawers  of  water”  to  the  few.  I am 
a Christian,  not  a pagan,  and  I hold  all  men  to  be  of  one 
blood,  and  to  have  the  common  rights  of  humanity,  and  one 
man  has  and  can  have  no  dominion  in  another,  except  in 
consideration  of  services  rendered.  Isay  not  with  our  abo- 
litionists that  man  can  have  no  property  in  man,  but  I do 
say,  offer  the  Supreme  Pontiff  Alexander  the  Third,  that  all 
men  by,  the  law  of  nature  are  free.  I do  not  deny  the  right 
of  the  Southern  master  to  the  services  of  his  slave;  but  I do 
deny  that  he  derives  that  right  from  the  municipal  law 
which  recognizes  and  defends  it.  As  between  him  and  his 
slave  the  master’s  right  is  founded,  and  can  be  founded,  only 
on  the  benefits  he  confers  on  the  slave,  and  the  measure  of 
these  benefits  is  the  measure  of  the  services  he  has  the  right 
to  exact  in  return.  The  slave,  no  matter  what  his  color  or 
his  race,  is  a man,  a human  being,  with  all  the  natural  rights 
of  his  master.  He  has  th e jus  dominii  of  himself  as  fully  as 
any  other  man  has  of  himself  I must  go  against  common 
sense,  and  the  spirit  of  all  Catholic  teachings,  to  deny  this. 
But  the  master  has  a claim  upon  him  for  the  services  he  ren- 


14 


ders  him.  He  protects  and  nurses  him  during  his  infancy, 
feeds  and  clothes  him  during  life,  and  takes  care  of  him  in 
sickness  and  old  age.  This  may  not  be,  and  probably  is 
not,  ordinarily  as  much  as  the  services  of  the  slave  are  worth 
to  the  master;  but  it  is  more  than  the  labor  of  the  slave,  upon 
a general  average,  would  be  worth  to  himself,  if  obliged  to 
take  the  sole  care  of  himself.  Take  the  class  of  slaves,  and 
suppose  the  masters  take  proper  care  of  them,  and  do  not 
overwork  them,  which  seldom  happens,  and  there  can  be  no 
doubt  that  the  slave  receives  in  his  maintenance,  in  the  pro- 
vision made  for  him  in  infancy,  sickness,  and  old  age,  a rea- 
sonable compensation  for  his  services,  and  more  than  the 
N orthern  laborer  ever  does  or  can  receive  for  the  same 
amount  of  labor,  for  the  Northern  laborer  works  nearly 
double  the  number  of  hours  that  the  slave  does,  with  far 
more  intensity,  and  with  fewer  recreations.  Your  negroes 
when  properly  treated,  are  no  doubt  better  off,  and  better 
paid  for  their  labor,  than  they  would  be  if  emancipated,  and 
therefore  the  masters  have  a right  to  their  services,  and  to 
retain  them  in  their  present  condition.  No  doubt  there  are 
instances  in  which  the  relation  is  abused,  but  this  is  another 
consideration,  and  to  be  disposed  of  on  other  principles,  for 
the  abuse  of  a thing  does  not  deny  the  legitimacy  of  its  use. 

Society  is  to  be  regarded  as  a whole,  as  a sort  of  living 
organism,  in  which  there  are  many  parts,  distinguishable  but 
not  separable  one  from  another.  All  the  parts  are  necessary, 
all  should  be  knit  together  in  a living  union,  and  move  on  in 
concert  as  a living  and  reasonable  being.  The  head  is  not 
to  be  valued  without  the  body,  nor  the  body  without  the 
members:  yet  the  body  should  have  a head,  and  the  head 
should  be  regarded  as  the  more  noble  part.  The  aristocracy 
are  not  to  he  separated  from  the  body  of  the  nation,  are  not 
to  be  regarded  as  existing  apart  and  for  themslv  e alone, 
but  as  existing  for  the  nation,  for  the  service  of  the  people, 
and  the  common  good  of  the  whole.  Nobility  is  not  a per- 


15 


sonal  right,  it  is  a trust — a trust  from  God  for  the  common 
good  of  the  nation.  “Let  him  that  would  be  greatest  among 
you  be  your  servant.”  When  the  nobility  forget  this, — when 
they  live  only  for  themselves,  regard  their  rank  and  privileges 
as  their  indefeasible  property,  and  use  their  superiority  only 
in  reference  to  their  own  selfish  ends,  they  lose  their  char- 
acter of  generosi , forget  their  nobility,  sink  to  mere  churls, 
and  instead  of  serving  the  nation  are  served  by  it,  and  in- 
stead of  guiding  and  leading  society  for  the  common  good 
become  an  intolerable  burden  upon  the  people  which  they 
will  be  sure  to  attempt  to  shake  off.  Such  became  the  old 
French  noblesse  under  the  reign  of  Louis  the  XV,  the  new 
nobility  under  the  Emperor,  the  Qrleanist  noblesse,  under 
“the  citizen  king,”  and  hence  the  revolutions  of  1789,  1814, 
1830,  and  1848,  which  have  threatened  the  very  existence  of 
European  society,  and  which  though  checked  for  the  mo- 
ment by  the  coup  d’etat  of  December,  1851,  are  not  yet 
concluded.  Such  are  rapidly  becoming  our  own  American 
nobility,  or  aristocracy.  Our  gentlemen  are  bankers,  sharp- 
ers, brokers,  stock-jobbers,  traders,  speculators,  attornies, 
pettifoggers,  and  in  general  worshippers  of  mammon.  They 
have  sometimes  the  manners,  uniformly  the  sentiments,  pas- 
sions, and  churlishness  of  the  lowest  of  the  people,  and  use 
the  people  instead  of  serving  them.  Hence  the  alarm  which 
wise  men  feel  for  the  safety  of  our  republic,  and  the  real 
prosperity  of  our  people. 

I am  well  aware  that  the  dominant  doctrine  of  the  day  is 
the  contrary  of  the  one,  which,  relying  on  the  wisdom  of 
antiquity  and  the  experience  ol  all  ages  and  nations,  I ven- 
ture to  re-assert.  The  prevalent  doctrine  of  the  day  is  that 
all  good  ascends  from  below,  and  that  every  thing  is  to  be 
condemned  that  does  not  operate  from  low  to  high.  The 
higher  classes  instead  of  guiding  and  directing  the  lower, 
muHt  consent  to  be  guided  and  directed  by  them  ; the  flock 
must  chose  and  commission  the  pastor ; the  ignorant  must 


16 


teach  the  learned;  the  inept  instruct  the  experienced;  the 
subject  give  the  law  to  the  sovereign ; and  the  church  must 
follow  the  instinct  of  the  masses,  be  fed  and  governed  by 
the  people,  instead  of  feeding  and  governing  them  according 
to  the  ordination  of  God.  This  is  the  grand  heresy  of  our 
age.  It  floats  in  our  atmosphere  as  a fatal  miasma,  and  we 
inhale  it  with  every  breath.  It  is  the  Welt-Geist  which  even 
men  who  pass  for  philosophers  bid  us  worship  as  the  true 
and  ever-living  God,  and  which  inspires  all  the  revolutionary 
movements  of  our  times.  But  be  assured  that  it  is  itself 
from  below,  not  from  above,  and  is  as  false  and  as  destruc- 
tive as  every  thing  else  that  rises  to  us  with  smoke  from  the 
bottomless  pit.  Every  good  and  perfect  gi/t  is  from  above, 
and  cometh  down  to  us  from  the  father  of  lights,  with  whom 
there  is  no  variableness  or  shadow  of  turning.  The  whole 
order  of  Providence  is  that. the  higher  should  guide  and 
govern  the  lower,  and  that  whatever  is  wise  and  good  cometh 
from  above,  and  operates  from  high  to  low,  never  as  the  age 
presumptuously  teaches  from  low  to  high. 

I quarrel  not  with  forms  of  government ; I find  no  fault 
with  the  political  institutions  of  our  country,  or  the  form  of 
civil  policy  our  fathers  have  bequeathed  us  It  is  not  of  our 
republican  institutions,  nor  of  the  popular  power  in  their  ad- 
ministration, that  a wise  man  will  complain,  but  the  false  and 
dangerous  doctrines,  according  to  which  these  institutions 
are  interpreted,  and  with  which  it  is  become  the  fashion  to 
identify  them.  I accept  and  defend  all  the  democracy  that 
was  incorporated  into  the  American  institutions  by  their 
original  framers,  but  I do  not  accept,  and  I should  blush  to 
defend,  the  vague  and  destructive  democracy  which  we  have 
borrowed  from  European  radicals,  and  which  has  turned 
the  heads  of  so  large  a portion  of  our  people.  I am, — as 
the  members  of  the  old  Jeffersonian  party  in  my  boyhood 
were  accustomed  to  say, — “ a republican,  but  I am  not  a 
democrat,”  and  he  who  is  a democrat  in  the  modern  Euro- 


17 


pean  sense,  and  the  sense  now  generally  adopted,  here  as 
elsewhere,  is  no  loyal  American  citizen;  for  democracy  as 
now  generally  understood  both  at  home  and  abroad  means 
either  the  unrestricted  right  of  the  majority  to  rule,  which  is 
social  despotism,  or  the  unrestricted  liberty  of  the  individual 
to  do  what  he  pleases,  which  is  anarchy.  No  institutions 
more  than  ours  demand  the  sanctity  of  law,  and  none  more 
imperiously  demand  the  existence  and  influence  of  a noble 
or  superior  class — a real  nobility,  titled  or  untitled.  It  is 
not  necessary  that  our  nobility  should  be  titled,  for  the  title 
no  more  makes  the  noble  than  the  habit  makes  the  monk  ; 
nor  is  it  necessary  that  they  should  be  recognized  by  the  law, 
and  have  a civil  constitution  as  in  England  ; but  it  is  neces- 
sary that  they  exist,  and  that  they  have  the  direction  of  af- 
fairs. The  larger  the  sphere  we  give  in  our  institutions  to 
the  great  body  of  the  people,  the  more  necessary  are  the 
wisdom,  the  virtue,  the  chivalry,  the  personal  worth  and  au- 
thority of  their  natural  chiefs  to  preserve  the  constitution, 
and  to  secure  the  wise  and  salutary  administration  of  gov- 
ernment. 

The  great  mistake  of  our  politicians  of  all  parties,  and 
perhaps  of  one  party  no  more  than  of  another,  is  in  suppos- 
ing that  the  criterion  of  truth  and  virtue  is  popular  sentiment, 
that  the  people  are  competent  to  teach  and  direct  their  nat- 
ural chiefs,  and  that  they  who  are  in  office  are  not  to  ascer- 
tain and  do  what  seems  to  them  just  and  proper  according 
to  their  own  reason  and  conscience,  but  simply  to  ascertain 
and  give  effect  to  the  wishes  of  the  people,  or  rather,  of  the 
party  which  has  placed  them  in  power.  Hence  the  highest 
officer  in  the  state,  nay,  in  the  nation,  becomes  but  the  mere 
tool  of  his  party,  and  is  held  to  be  as  irresponsible,  save  to 
his  party,  as  the  trowel  or  the  spade  in  the  hands  of  the 
workman;  even  our  best  men  are  inclined  to  echo  the  sen- 
timent and  pander  to  the  prejudices  of  the  mob.  They  who 
should  be  our  gentlemen,  our  noblemen,  maintain  no  person- 


18 


al  independence,  and  cease  to  speak  and  act  as  freemen. 
They  lack  the  courage,  the  virtue,  to  stand  up  as  bold  and 
chivalrous  knights  in  defence  of  truth  and  justice.  They 
lose  the  nice  sense  of  honor,  the  invincible  courage,  the  man- 
liness of  character,  and  the  true  nobility  of  feeling,  which 
constitute  the  freeman  or  make  the  nobleman,  and  become 
sly  and  subtle,  cunning  and  artful,  seeking  not  to  govern  the 
people,  but  to  use  them,  and  to  accomplish  their  own  selfish 
ends  by  flattery,  cajolery,  and  intrigue.  They  stoop  to  con- 
quer, consent  to  be  slaves  of  the  base  passions  of  the  mob 
that  they  may  be  its  masters.  Hence  the  baseness  and  ve- 
nality of  our  public  men,  and  our  lack,  as  a people,  of  the 
noble  virtue  of  loyalty,  in  the  sense  of  the  French  loyaute , 
and  our  contempt  for  the  rights  of  our  neighbors,  which  if 
not  corrected  must  ultimately  place  us  out  of  the  pale  of  civ- 
ilized nations. 

No  doubt  others,  as  well  as  I,  see  whither  our  republic  is 
tending,  and  feel  the  necessity  of  a remedy;  but  following 
out  the  false  doctrine  borrowed  from  the  old  French  Jaco- 
bins, the  greater  part  of  them  seek  the  remedy  in  popular 
education,  or  in  the  extension  and  support  of  common 
schools.  F ar  be  it  from  me  to  speak  lightly  of  common 
schools,  but  I do  not  believe  that  any  education  can  entirely 
remedy  the  evil.  The  age  is  as  mad  in  its  worship  of  edu- 
cation, as  it  is  in  its  worship  of  radical  or  socialistic  democ- 
racy. Education  at  best  is  far  from  being  omnipotent,  and 
no  possible  training  of  youth  will  infallibly  make  them  what 
the  wants  of  a free  state  demand.  There  is  no  subject  on 
which  there  is  more  disgusting  cant  vented  in  our  days  than 
this  very  subject  of  education,  and  I fear  something  worse 
than  cant.  It  is  far  easier  to  educate  for  evil  than  for  good, 
for  children  since  the  Fall  take  to  evil  as  naturally  as  ducks 
take  ta  water.  The  enemies  of  religion^  and  society  under- 
stand this  perfectly  well,  and  hence  whenever  in  their  power 
they  seize  upon  the  schools,  and  seek  to  control  the  education 


19 


of  the  young.  To  accomplish  their  purposes,  they  have  only 
to  exclude  religion  from  the  schools,  under  the  plea  of  ex- 
cluding sectarianism,  and  instead  of  teaching  religion,  teach 
as  Frances  Wright  was  accustomed  to  say,  know -ledge,  and 
they  may  soon  have  a community  whose  thoughts  and  affec- 
tions will  be  exclusively  of  the  earth  earthy. 

It  is  not  without  design  that  I have  mentioned  the  name 
of  Francis  Wright,  the  favorite  pupil  of  Jeremy  Bentham, 
and  famous  infidel  lecturer  through  our  country,  some  twenty 
years  ago  ; for  I happen  to  know,  what  may  not  be  known 
to  you  all,  that  she  and  her  friends  were  the  great  movers  in 
the  scheme  of  godless  education,  now  the  fashion  in  our  coun- 
try. I knew  this  remarkable  woman  well,  and  it  was  my 
shame  to  share,  for  a time,  many  of  her  views,  for  which  I 
ask  pardon  of  God  and  of  my  countrymen.  I was  for  a brief 
time  in  her  confidence,  and  one  of  those  selected  to  carry 
into  execution  her  plans.  The  great  object  was  to  get  rid 
of  Christianity,  and  to  convert  our  Churches  into  Halls  of 
science.  The  plan  was  not  to  make  open  attacks  on  reli- 
gion, although  we  might  belabor  the  clergy  and  bring  them 
into  contempt  where  we  could ; but  to  establish  a system  of 
state,  we  said,  national  schools,  from  which  all  religion  was 
to  be  excluded,  in  which  nothing  was  to  be  taught  but  such 
knowledge  as  is  verifiable  by  the  senses,  and  to  which  all 
parents  were  to  be  compelled  by  law  to  send  their  children. 
Our  complete  plan  was  to  take  the  children  from  their  pa- 
rents at  the  age  of  twelve  or  eighteen  months,  and  to  have 
them  nursed,  fed,  clothed  and  trained  in  these  schools  at  the 
public  expense;  but  at  any  rate,  we  were  to  have  godless 
schools  for  all  the  children  of  the  country,  to  which  the  pa- 
rents would  be  compelled  by  law  to  send  them.  The  first 
thing  to  be  done  was  to  get  this  system  of  schools  estab- 
lished. For  this  purpose,  a secret  society  was  formed,  and 
the  whole  country  was  to  be  organized  somewhat  on  the  plan 
of  the  Carbonari  of  Italy,  or  as  were  the  revolutionists 


20 


throughout  Europe  by  Bazard  preparatory  to  the  revolutions 
of  1820  and  1830.  This  organization  was  commenced  in 
1829,  in  the  city  of  New  York,  and  to  my  own  knowledge 
was  effected  throughout  a considerable  part  of  New  York 
State.  How  far  it  was  extended  in  other  States,  or  whether 
it  is  still  kept  up  I know  not,  for  I abandoned  it  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  year  1830,  and  have  since  had  no  confidential  re- 
lations with  any  engaged  in  it;  but  this  much  I can  say,  the  - 
plan  has  been  successfully  pursued,  the  views  we  put  forth 
have  gained  great  popularity,  and  the  whole  action  of  the 
country  on  the  subject  has  taken  the  direction  we  sought  to 
give  it.  I have  observed  too  that  many  who  were  associated 
with  us  and  relied  upon  to  carry  out  the  plan,  have  taken 
the  lead  in  what  has  been  done  on  the  subject.  One  of  the 
principal  movers  of  the  scheme  had  no  mean  share  in  organ- 
izing the  Smithsonian  Institute,  and  is  now,  I believe,  one  of 
the  representatives  of  our  government  at  an  Italian  court. 
It  would  be  worth  inquiring,  if  there  were  any  means  of  as- 
certaining, how  large  a share  this  secret  infidel  society,  with 
its  members  all  through  the  country  unsuspected  by  the  pub- 
lic, and  unknown  to  each  other,  yet  all  known  to  a central 
committee,  and  moved  by  it,  have  had  in  giving  the  extraor- 
dinary impulse  to  godless  education  which  all  must  have  re- 
marked since  1830,  an  impulse  which  seems  too  strong  for 
any  human  power  now  to  resist. 

But  though  such  an  education  as  we  are  laboring  to  give 
American  children  in  our  common  schools,  is  only  fitted  to 
make  them  infidels,  libertines,  sharpers  and  rogues,  I do 
not  believe  even  a thoroughly  religious  education  given,  in 
Catholic  schools  by  Catholic  teachers  and  professors,  would 
wholly  remedy  the  evil,  because  the  practical  part  of  our  edu- 
cation is  never  received  within  the  school  room,  but  at  home, 
in  the  streets,  in  the  saloons,  from  associates,  and  the  general 
habits,  manners,  customs,  and  tone  of  the  society  in  which 
children  grow  up ; and  because  not  natural  training  but  grace 


21 


alone  can  elevate  our  fallen  nature  to  genuine  virtue.  The 
schoolhouse  can  never  be  a substitute  for  the  church,  the 
schoolmaster  for  the  priest,  or  education  for  the  sacra- 
ments. Nevertheless,  education  can  do  something,  and  it  is 
the  ordinary  human  mode  by  which  we  are  to  attempt  to 
secure  the  virtue  of  a community.  That  is,  a religious  edu- 
cation, not  merely  instruction  in  simply  human  knowledge. 

But  there  is  no  greater  mistake  than  that  of  placing  our 
chief  reliance  on  common  schools,  however  well  organized, 
and  however  religious,  or  of  expecting  our  security  from  the 
education  of  the  mass,  as  seems  to  be  the  general  opinion  of 
our  countrymen.  With  a territory  stretching  from  the  At- 
lantic, and  which  will  soon  stretch,  in  all  probability,  from 
the  Isthmus  of  Darien  to  the  North  Pole,  we  have  not  a sin- 
gle institution  deserving  the  name  of  University;  and  claim- 
ing to  be  a reading  people,  we  stand  in  regard  to  public 
libraries,  the  lowest  on  the  list  of  civilized  nations.  There 
is  not  a single  branch  of  literature  or  science  which  demands 
erudition  for  its  treatment,  that  can  be  treated  by  the  Amer- 
ican scholar  without  going  abroad  to  consult  foreign  libra- 
ries. No  adequate  provision  is  made  for  the  higher  class  of 
liberal  studies,  for  the  higher  branches  of  genuine  scholar- 
ship. We  have,  indeed,  a good  military  academy,  a good 
naval  school,  perhaps,  and  some  passable  law  schools;  but 
in  matters  of  political  and  civil  administration,  of  statesman- 
ship and  diplomacy,  we  have  no  system  of  training,  and  are 
compelled  to  rely  on  ineptness  and  inexperience.  Yet  we 
boast  of  being  an  enlightened  people.  Our  whole  land  is, 
so  to  speak,  covered  over  with  common  schools,  fdled  with 
common  school  libraries  composed  of  a few  dozen  wishy 
washy  volumes  each,  and  we  seem  to  imagine  that  to  read, 
write  and  cipher  is  all  that  is  necessary  to  enlighten  a peo- 
ple, and  to  make  them  wise  and  virtuous,  competent  to  all 
the  complicated  affairs  of  civil  and  social  life. 

I complain  not  that  common  schools  are  universal,  I com- 


22 


plain  not  that  they  do  not  teach  more  branches  and  turn  out 
more  thorough  scholars.  They  already  attempt  too  much, 
more  than  is  requisite  for  the  mass  of  a people,  more  than  the 
great  body  of  our  children  can  study  to  any  advantage. 
Common  schools  are  well  enough  in  their  place,  though  less 
important  than  our  age  would  have  us  believe.  They  can 
impart  as  much  instruction  as  the  people,  considering  their 
ordinary  duties  and  avocations  in  life,  can  acquire;  hut  they 
cannot  suffice  for  the' wants  of  a nation.  You  can  never 
make  all  the  people  scholars,  give  to  all  a liberal  training — 
not,  if  you  will,  for  lack  of  ability  on  their  part,  but  for  lack 
of  opportunity,  and  for  the  necessary  incompatibility  between 
such  training  and  the  menial  offices  of  life,  which  require  the 
constant  labor  and  application  of  the  great  majority  of  every 
community.  These  offices  unfit  one  for  liberal  studies,  and 
liberal  studies  unfit  one  for  them.  Give,  if  it  were  possible, 
to  the  whole  community  the  education,  the  culture,  the  re- 
finement and  elevated  manners  and  tastes  of  the  few,  and 
without  which  a nation  remains  uncivilized,  the  great  busi- 
ness of  life  would  come  to  a stand-still,  and  your  nation  would 
be  like  an  army  without  privates,  or  a ship  without  common 
sailors.  On  the  other  hand  to  reduce  all  education  and  all 
culture  to  the  level  of  your  common  schools,  is  to  have  no 
officers,  none  qualified  to  take  the  command  and  fill  the 
higher  offices  of  civilized  society.  The  Mexican  war  taught 
our  democratic  statesmen  the  value  of  West  Point,  and  we 
shall  not  very  soon  see  again  ignorant  civilians  chosen  in 
preference  to  trained  soldiers,  to  command  our  troops.  The 
great  bulk  of  every  community  always  has  depended  and 
always  will  depend  on  the  leadership  in  all  things  of  the  few. 

Here,  then,  you  see  the  significance  of  liberal  studies,  and 
their  absolute  necessity  to  every  enlightened  and  well  ordered 
state.  Liberal  studies  are  the  studies  of  the  fewr,  they  are 
the  studies  of  freemen,  that  is,  of  gentlemen,  and  their  office 
is  to  qualify  them  to  be  wise  and  prudent,  just  and  noble, 


23 


able  guides  and  leaders,  that  is,  the  faithful  and  competent 
servants  of  the  community.  It  is  not  because  you  have  bet- 
ter blood  than  others,  it  is  not  that  society  exists  for  you, 
for  you  all  nature  blooms,  and  for  you  the  people  live 
and  labor,  that  you  are  to  pursue  liberal  studies,  and  acquire 
the  knowledge,  the  tastes  and  accomplishments  of  gentlemen, 
but  that  you  may  exert  a wise  and  salutary  influence  on  the 
great  body  of  the  nation.  You  are  for  the  nation,  not  the 
nation  for  you;  you  are  to  sustain  it,  not  it  you.  Your  lib- 
eral education  is  a trust  which  you  hold  from  God  for  the 
people,  and  you  are  to  use  it,  not  for  your  own  private  ben- 
efit, but  in  their  service ; not  as  a facile  means  of  compelling 
them  to  serve  you,  but  as  the  necessary  means  of  serving 
them. 

In  the  view  of  the  case  I have  presented,  the  important 
thing  in  every  nation,  above  all  in  every  popularly  constituted 
state,  is  not  as  we  have  foolishly  imagined,  common  school 
education,  is  not  the  education  of  the  mass,  but  the  education 
of  the  gentlemen.  When,  what  we  call  the  upper  classes  are 
properly  trained — which  by  the  by  they  are  not,  with  us — - 
when  they  have  the  principles,  the  virtues,  the  habits  and  the 
tastes  proper  to  their  order,  your  state  will  flourish.  It  is 
the  few  that  lift  the  many,  and  the  virtues  of  the  aristocracy 
that  secure  the  virtues  of  the  people,  on  the  principle  I have 
all  along  contended  for,  that  all  good  is  from  above,  and 
operates  from  high  to  low,  not  as  a wild  and  inept  democ- 
racy will  have  it,  from  low  to  high. 

Do  not  suppose,  gentlemen,  that  I am  unaware  that  the 
doctrine  I have  set  forth  is  directly  opposed  to  the  popular 
doctrine  of  our  country,  or  that  I need  to  be  told  that  it  un- 
easily be  misapprehended,  and  made  the  occasion  of  repre- 
senting me  as  opposed  to  the  people,  and  in  favor  of  despot- 
ism, monarchy,  and  a titled  aristocracy.  I am  well  aware 
of  all  this,  for  I am  not  utterly  without  experience,  and  if  I 
sought  to  win  popularity,  or  to  gain  the  applause  of  the  mul- 
titude, I should  have  brought  out  a very  different  doctrine, 


2 4 


and  proved  my  utter  unworthiness  to  be  your  orator  on  an 
occasion  like  this.  I cannot  boast  of  a long  line  of  distin- 
guished ancestors,  I cannot  boast  of  having  received  even  a 
liberal  education  in  any  adequate  sense  of  that  word;  but  T 
can  with  honest  pride  boast  that  I am  and  always  have  been, 
according  to  the  measure  of  my  light  and  ability,  a freeman. 
I glory  in  bending  my  knee  to  God  and  to  God’s  minister, 
but  I have  never  yet  learned  to  bend  it  to  the  mob,  or  to 
surrender  the  freedom  and  independence  of  my  own  soul  to 
the  despotism  of  public  opinion  I claim  to  be  a man,  an 
individual,  with  rights  which  I will  die  sooner  than  surren- 
der, and  duties,  which  I dare  not  neglect.  As  far  as  I am 
able  I labor  to  form  a true  and  noble  public  opinion,  not  to 
obey  public  opinion  whatever  it  may  be.  I ash  not  what  the 
people  will  say,  but  what  is  just,  what  is  true,  what  is  neces- 
sary or  useful  to  be  said. 

Such,  gentlemen,  I conceive  is  the  spirit  of  the  true  schol- 
ar, of  the  gentleman,  of  the  freeman,  and  such  is  the  spirit 
with  which  I wish  you  to  be  animated.  You  are,  I take  it 
for  granted,  Catholics,  and  as  such  you  have  been  taught  the 
truth  from  God  himself,  and  know  what  you  are  to  believe 
and  to  do,  and  have  no  need  to  learn  it  from  popular  opin- 
ion, from  the  Welt-Geist,  or  spirit  of  the  age.  You  are  in- 
structed from  above;  therefore  you  can  safely  labor  to  form 
the  popular  mind,  without  danger  of  misforming  it,  and  in 
your  several  spheres  prove  yourselves  safe  guides  and  leaders 
of  the  people.  Understand  well  that  this  is  your  mission, 
and  dare  discharge  It,  fearlessly,  bravely,  heroically,  whether 
you  have  the  multitude  with  you,  or  have,  as  most  likely 
will  be  the  case,  the  multitude  against  you.  Be  brave,  cour- 
teous, chivalrous  knights,  in  defence  of  truth  and  justice,  so 
shall  you  be  without  fear  and  without  reproach;  so  shall  you 
serve  your  country,  avert,  it  may  be,  the  dangers  which 
threaten  it,  gain  a name,  which  11  posterity  will  not  willingly 
let  die,”  and,  what  is  infinitely  better,  everlasting  life  and 
eternal  glory  in  Heaven. 


» 


